Kantianism and Utilitarianism: A Contrast of Philosophies

This essay contrasts the philosophies of Kantianism and Utilitarianism, discussing their differences in moral philosophy and decision-making.

Running head: KANTIANISM AND UTILITIARINISM
Kantianism and Utilitarianism
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author’s Note:

1KANTIANISM AND UTILITIARINISM
“Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of
any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end”
The above quoted lines of Immanuel Kant from his famous work “Grounding for the
Metaphysics of Morals/On a Supposed Right to Lie Because of Philanthropic Concerns”
forms the fulcrum round which most of the moral philosophy revolves. It is to be noted that
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) was one of the major philosophers of not Germany but of the
entire world (Wood). His theories related to morality and the “rightness or the wrongness” of
any action are still in use and make modern philosophers still take the help of his
philosophies to develop further theories in the relevant field (Wood). However, his
philosophy is often contrasted with the precepts of the philosophies of Utilitarianism. This
essay intends to give contrast the philosophies of Kant with the philosophies of
Utilitarianism.
The major philosophies of Kant are grouped under the heading “Kantianism” and this
particular genre is used to give a broader overview of the moral philosophies of Kant. In the
moral philosophy of Kant the rightness or the wrongness of a particular action is decided on
the basis of the action concerned and not on the end result (Kant). It is interesting to note that
the feelings involved in the course of the action or the process are not taken into
consideration by Kant. It is a reflection of this thought process that Kant says “It is not
necessary that whilst I live I live happily; but it is necessary that so long as I live I should live
honourably” (Kant). Therefore, the various theories as well as the philosophies of Kant have
come under much criticism in the recent times. Another major precept of the philosophies of
Kant is his over-reliance on the reason or the intellectualism of the human beings. Thus, he
says in his famous work “Critique of Pure Reason”, “Whereas the beautiful is limited, the
sublime is limitless, so that the mind in the presence of the sublime, attempting to imagine
what it cannot, has pain in the failure but pleasure in contemplating the immensity of the

2KANTIANISM AND UTILITIARINISM
attempt” (Kant). The philosophies related to Utilitarianism, on the other hand, consider that
the rightness or the wrongness of a particular action depends on the amount of good or utility
which it does to the maximum number of people (Mill). Therefore, for this particular school
of philosophers the actions involved in a particular event matter the most as well as the final
outcome. It is to be noted that in the present times various scholars have used the
philosophies of Kant to justify war, abortion and other actions of theirs. However, when they
are viewed under the lens of Utilitarianism they become totally unjustified (Barrow). Thus, in
the opinion of Leon Trotsky articulated in his famous work “Their Morals and Ours”, “The
end may justify the means as long as there is something that justifies the end”. This particular
statement of Trotsky is often seen as the inherent difference between the precepts of
philosophies of Kant and Utilitarianism (Barrow). This statement of Trotsky is often
contrasted with the remark of Kant which states that “Seek not the favor of the multitude; it is
seldom got by honest and lawful means. But seek the testimony of few; and number not
voices, but weigh them”. It is to be noted that the debate about the rightness and the
wrongness of a particular action when under the lens of the two schools of philosophies seem
to conflict with each other.
Therefore, from the above discussion it becomes clear that although the philosophies
of Kant as well as the Utilitarianism are considered two important parts of the subject of
philosophy yet there are some inherent differences between the two schools of philosophical
thoughts. It is interesting to note that a particular action when seen under the lens of the
philosophies of Kant becomes justified however when the same action is seen under the lens
of the philosophies of Utilitarianism it becomes unjustified and vice versa. Therefore, the
rightness or the wrongness of a particular action depends on the philosophy in which they are
interoperated.

3KANTIANISM AND UTILITIARINISM
References
Barrow, Robin. Utilitarianism: A contemporary statement. Routledge, 2015.
Kant, Immanuel. Fundamental principles of the metaphysics of morals. Courier Corporation,
2012.
Kant, Immanuel. Kant: The metaphysics of morals. Cambridge University Press, 2017.
Kant, Immanuel. Moral Law: Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Routledge, 2013.
Mill, John Stuart. "Utilitarianism." Seven Masterpieces of Philosophy. Routledge, 2016. 337-
383.
Wood, Allen. "The final form of Kant’s practical philosophy." Immanuel Kant. Routledge,
2017. 27-47.